C## -- with two pound signs? [closed] - naming

It's difficult to tell what is being asked here. This question is ambiguous, vague, incomplete, overly broad, or rhetorical and cannot be reasonably answered in its current form. For help clarifying this question so that it can be reopened, visit the help center.
Closed 13 years ago.
Visual Basic .NET
C##
etc
C#? With two pound signs?
It's on so many of these programming résumés we're getting -- from random people -- listed as a qualification.
Any ideas what these folks are talking about? Is this convention an accidental holdover from C++, or something?
EDIT/ANSWER: Turns out the corporate résumé management system converts the "C#" that applicants specify to "C##". That is just fantastic.

My guess is you shouldn't hire them.

Looks like a recruiter who doesn't know what he is talking about is trying to impress you.

That résumé speaks for itself - little attention to detail. Not good for a programmer...

If it's on "so many" I'm willing to bet that the candidates don't know what they are talking about. Similarly, I have seen 'C+' listed as a language as well.
It's not uncommon for people to list as many languages on their resume as they can, because the Bad Ones think that even knowing the name of the language gives them a foot ahead of someone who doesn't. This is obviously a flaw in logic.
I can't remember exactly where I heard this story before (someone's blog, maybe someone will remember) but the exact situation is described. A candidate comes in with a resume listing all of these languages. As the interviewer asks the candidate to demonstrate their knowledge of the language by writing some code, the candidate freezes. When the interviewer asks why, the candidate responds with "I didn't say I knew how to write in those languages, just that I know of them!"

I received a resume before has this line in the list of experiences
C \ C+ \ C++ \ C#
:)

C Sharp - now even sharper!

Related

Non-deterministic CSP programming tool? [closed]

It's difficult to tell what is being asked here. This question is ambiguous, vague, incomplete, overly broad, or rhetorical and cannot be reasonably answered in its current form. For help clarifying this question so that it can be reopened, visit the help center.
Closed 10 years ago.
Hi i need a non deterministic constraint satisfaction problem tool, because i need different solutions with the same input of the problem. Someone knows about a tool with this characteristic?
I only know tools like Gecode (c++), Choco (Java) and Curry (Haskell) that i think work in deterministic way.
If what you want is to get some random solution, most CP tools have some support for using randomised heuristics. For example, the standard Gecode branchers have options for this, for example INT_VAR_RND and INT_VAL_RND for integer variables. To get a different search each time, make sure to set the seed uniquely.
Note that using random heuristics will not give you any guarantee of the distribution. For example, your problem might have only two solutions, but almost all random choices might lead to one of the solutions giving a very skewed distribution.
Are you trying to do Pareto optimization (aka multi-objective optimization) and let the user choose one of the pareto optimal solutions?
People have done this with Drools Planner (java, open source) by simply replacing the BestSolutionRecaller class. See this thread and this thread. Planner 6.0 or 6.1 will provide out-of-the-box pareto support.
Similar to what Zayenz said, you can try Minion with the flag -randomiseorder.

How to run a Linux/C program in a customized way? [closed]

It's difficult to tell what is being asked here. This question is ambiguous, vague, incomplete, overly broad, or rhetorical and cannot be reasonably answered in its current form. For help clarifying this question so that it can be reopened, visit the help center.
Closed 11 years ago.
I need to write a program that is to be run as follows: <program_name>_ <space> _<file_name>_ <space> _<stuff to be written into the file>. I am new to Linux/C/Unix programming and so I need your help. From what I can understand, I need to write a program titled <program_name>, pass two parameters in the main function which are <file_name> and <stuff to be written in the file>, and then go through the code as usual, writing all the required lines. Am I going about this the right way? Also, it is mentioned that I am to create a make file out of the program. As I am thoroughly unfamiliar with Linux, I would like to know if that this would change anything. That is, would my approach to the program change because I am to make a make file out of it? Thanks for the help! :)
You should search for "beginning linux" to get some web sites that will give you the basics of navigating around in Linux, notably on the command line.
Then I'd search for "beginning vi" to learn the basics of the vi editor. If you're using a GUI, then you can simply use their simple GUI text editor.
Then I would search on "Beginning C programming linux". That will give you several links, and will get you through the basics of creating a C program and compiling it with GCC.
That should keep you in enough trouble for the short term until something clicks or you learn enough new terms to keep searching for.
Good luck!

Is there any programming language that lets you redefine its type system? [closed]

It's difficult to tell what is being asked here. This question is ambiguous, vague, incomplete, overly broad, or rhetorical and cannot be reasonably answered in its current form. For help clarifying this question so that it can be reopened, visit the help center.
Closed 12 years ago.
I'm looking for programming languages that let you redefine their type system without having to hack into the compiler. Is there anything out there that allows you to do that?
Thanks
In C you can use DEFINE to redefine everything.
#DEFINE int double
Whether it's good or bad you can find out here:
What is the worst real-world macros/pre-processor abuse you've ever come across?
If you're talking about redefining an actual type system, like making a statically typed language dynamic or making a weakly-typed language strongly-typed, then no.
Practically every language lets you define your own types, so I don't think that's what you meant either.
The only thing I can think of that might fit into what you're asking about are Macros in Common Lisp, which let you extend the syntax. This might be able to acheive what you are looking for, but until you state what it is exactly you're looking for, I can't really elaborate.
Also OCaml and its related languages allow you to do some pretty cool things with types. You can basically define any kind of type you can think of and then match against it with pattern matching, which makes it especially good to write compilers in.
Javascript, Ruby, and Smalltalk, just that i know of, allow you to do all kinds of stuff, even redefining on the fly what an Object can do. Perl allows you to redefine practically the whole language. Basically any decent scripting language, especially one that allows duck typing, should have equal power. But it seems to be really common among functional languages and those with functional abilities.
If I remember correctly, Ada have neat type-creation possibilities, specially for measures (for instance, defining a minimum and a maximum, checking operations between differents measures...). I've seen it quoted as an example to avoid very stupid bugs.

What was the first 'hobby' programming language? [closed]

It's difficult to tell what is being asked here. This question is ambiguous, vague, incomplete, overly broad, or rhetorical and cannot be reasonably answered in its current form. For help clarifying this question so that it can be reopened, visit the help center.
Closed 13 years ago.
What was the first programming language that had user-accessibility? For instance, a programming language that offered itself to the public for experimentation, personal use, hobby, etc; something that wasn't just 'behind the scenes' and for use by big companies for putting together professional products and services.
BASIC (1964) was at the very least the first popular hobby language.
It may not have been the first available but one of the most important has to be Integer BASIC, known as Apple BASIC originally. It was included with the Apple II.
I spent a lot of time in Commodore BASIC on my home Commodore 64 (a version of Microsoft 6502 BASIC very similar to Apple BASIC) and the various Apple computers my school had. Part of the reason I'm a programmer today is the joy of seeing the teachers struggle to exit an endless loop, finally giving up and rebooting the computer so the next kid could play Joust.
The Micral is regarded as the first personal computer. I believe you could only write programs for it in 8008 machine or assembly language. As for hobby languages (which were used on hobby computers), machine languages were the first, usually entered via front-panel toggles. The SCELBI and Mark-8 were the first marketed hobby computers; before that, hobby computers were custom made by their users, with instruction sets often cribbed from the PDP-8 instruction set[2]. The first higher level language was the version of BASIC produced by Bill Gates and Paul Allen for the Altair[3].
Further references:
The Micral, Armand Van Dormael
The early days of personal computers, Stephen B. Gray
Short History of the Microcomputer
Wikipedia: Micral
Wikipedia: SCELBI
If you count initial conception and prototyping, I'd give the vote to [Forth](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forth_(programming_language).

Am I the only one who makes spelling and grammar mistakes when programming? [closed]

It's difficult to tell what is being asked here. This question is ambiguous, vague, incomplete, overly broad, or rhetorical and cannot be reasonably answered in its current form. For help clarifying this question so that it can be reopened, visit the help center.
Closed 13 years ago.
I don't know if I am a bad programmer because I often make mistakes when outputting information on a site, things like "thanx for subscribing to our service" instead of "Thanks for subscribing to our service".
I think this is because I usually don't concentrate on the spelling, my main focus is to get the functionality running perfectly. Please give me your opinion, do you concentrate on the spellings or the functionality?
If I'm writing a message which will be visible to users, I'll make sure it's clear and correct. If I'm writing a message which will only be visible to other developers, I'm slightly less careful - in particular, typos aren't really a problem, so long as I express myself clearly.
Fortunately my spelling/typing/grammar is reasonably good anyway, so I don't need to think too hard about this, but I think it is important for customer-facing text.
Developers often aren't very good at writing messages for users. It can be hard to put yourself in the position of someone who really has no idea about what's going on in the background: they just want to get their email (or whatever it is) working. If you're lucky, you may be able to get a technical writer to help compose appropriate text.
IMO attention must be paid to both. Cool logic and reliability are no excuse for crappy texts.
You could separate checking the resource from changing the source. When you do changes first change the code, test everything, then proofread the resources.
The CTO at my last job was dyslexic, and a completely brilliant programmer and manager. Every now and then I would go and make a spelling correction to one of his method or variable names (C# handles the refactoring pretty well) and it didn't really matter that much.
When there's user interface work it's much more important to spell things correctly coz it looks very shabby to have a misspelled UI.

Resources